alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Technologies Formulation and Cure Data CBI CBI

y

Wood formulation n

y

Aliphatic Wood Coatings n

y

N

Y

N

2 Component 

Polyurethane Elastomeric 

Coatings - 100% solids 

(End use applications may 

include Truckbed linings, 

Elastomeric Concrete 

coatings, etc.)

Aliphatic Spray Elastomer 

System

N Y

High Build MCU Y

y

y

Iron Oxide Intermediate 

Coating Y

y

Waterborne PU Topcoat

n

2-Component 

Polyurethane 

Solventborne Coating 

(End use applications may 

include Automotive 

Refinish, Wood Coating, 

Industrial Finishing, etc.) 

n

1 Component 

Polyurethane 

Solventborne Coatings 

(End use applications may 

include Corrosion 

protection, Concrete, 

Metal, etc.)

2 Component 

Polyurethane Waterborne 

Coating (End use 

applications may include 

Floor coatings, Wood 

coatings, Plastic coatings, 

Concrete coatings, etc.)

Wood and Furniture Coatings

ChemistryOfPolyurethaneCoatings

Green Chemistry Challenge

2K Waterborne Brochure

Structure/Chemistry and/or Literature

Thick Film Coatings

ChemistryOfPolyurethaneCoatings

n

n

ChemistryOfPolyurethaneCoatings
y

n

n

1 Component Moisture 

Cure Urethane Sealants 

and 2 Component 

Polyurea Sealants (End 

use applications may 

include Construction 

sealants, etc.)

y n

Silane Terminated 

Polyether Sealants (End 

use applications may 

include Construction 

sealants, Wood 

adhesives, etc.)

N/A (no isocyanate reaction 

during cure) y

y

n

y

y

n

n

Ultraviolet Light Cure 

(End use applications may 

include Plastic Coatings, 

Metal Finishing, Wood 

N/A (no isocyanate reaction 

during cure) n y

Ultraviolet Light Dual 

Cure (End Use 

applications may include 

Plastic Coatings, Metal 

Finishing, Wood Coatings, 

etc.)

Dual Cure Y

N/A (no chemical reaction 

during cure because no 

isocyanates)

1 Component 

Polyurethane Dispersions 

for Waterborne Coatings 

(End use applications may 

include Glass Fiber Sizing, 

Concrete, Wood, Plastic 

and Textile Coatings)

Isocyanate Terminated 

Prepolymer (End Use 

applications may include 

Adhesives, Wood 

Adhesives, etc.)

ChemistryOfPolyurethaneCoatings

ChemistryOfPolyurethaneCoatings

ChemistryOfPolyurethaneCoatings

ChemistryOfPolyureth

aneCoatings

ChemistryOfPolyurethaneCoatings

Waterborne Ultraviolet 

Light Cure (End use 

applications may include 

Plastic Coatings, Metal 

Finishing, Wood Coatings, 

etc.)

N/A (no isocyanate reaction 

during cure)
NOT CBI - External Article on Isocyanatekinetics
CBI

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y

Y
<PAGE>

                                                                           EX-23


                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



PAGE 64



                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


            We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-89473, 333-23091, 333-89473,
333-54018, 333-54026, and 333-71548) of our report dated April 28, 2003 relating
to the consolidated financial statements of Drexler Technology Corporation which
appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A. We also consent to the
incorporation by reference of our report dated April 28, 2003 relating to the
financial statement schedule for Fiscal 2003 and Fiscal 2002, which appears in
this Form 10-K/A.


/s/PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
San Jose, California
September 29, 2003


                                       62
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7121

BOUNDARY MCCALL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

and

ERIC LEON WALTERS,

Plaintiff,

versus

MICKY RAY; MR. GRAVETT; MR. SMITH; JOHN DOE,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Beaufort. William B. Traxler, Jr., District

Judge. (CA-96-1059-9-21JC)

Submitted: February 27, 1997 Decided: March 11, 1997

Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Boundary McCall, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on

his action brought pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents

of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewed

the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. McCall v.

Ray, No. CA-96-1059-9-21JC (D.S.C. June 28, 1996). We dispense with

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would

not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
**Exhibit      32.2**

**18      U.S.C. Section 1350**

**As      Adopted Pursuant to**

**Section      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

| (1)                      | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (2) | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                     |                                                    | **Metwood,              Inc.**          |
|------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                                     |                                                    |
|                                |                                               |                               |
| Date: October              19, 2005 | By:                                           | /s/ Shawn              A. Callahan |
|                                     | Shawn A. CallahanChief                Financial Officer |
#### In the Matter of Zelda McM., a Child Alleged to be Neglected. Patrick L.-O. McM., Appellant; Administration for Children’s Services, Respondent.

[62 NYS3d 349]

Order of fact-finding, Family Court, New York County (Jane Pearl, J.), entered on or about September 12, 2016, which found that respondent father had neglected the subject child, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The findings of neglect are supported by a preponderance of the evidence *(see*Family Ct Act § 1046 [b] [i]). The mother’s testimony, which the court credited, was sufficient to establish that the father had committed acts of domestic violence against *574the mother on at least two occasions, while the child was in close proximity, thereby subjecting the child to actual or imminent danger of physical impairment *(see e.g. Matter of Macin D. [Miguel D.],*148 AD3d 572, 573 [1st Dept 2017]; see also *Matter of Kelly A. [Ghyslaine G.],*95 AD3d 784, 784 [1st Dept 2012]).

Family Court properly drew the “strongest possible negative inference” against the father for his failure to testify *(Matter of Ninoshka M. [Liz R.],*125 AD3d 567, 568 [1st Dept 2015]). There are no grounds for disturbing the court’s credibility determinations, including the weight to be given to any inconsistencies in testimony, as the court was in the best position to observe and assess the demeanor of the witnesses *(see Matter of Nathaniel T.,*67 NY2d 838, 842 [1986]; *Matter of Jared S. [Monet S.],*78 AD3d 536 [1st Dept 2010], *lv denied*16 NY3d 705 [2011]). The mother’s detailed testimony concerning repeated incidents of domestic violence was corroborated in part by the caseworker’s testimony, photographs documenting injuries, and medical records relating to yet another incident of domestic violence.

Based on the mother’s testimony that the father was never sober, used drugs every day, and smoked marijuana while caring for the child, the mother established a prima facie showing of neglect based on the father’s misuse of drugs *(see*Family Ct Act § 1046 [a] [iii]; *Matter of Keoni Daquan A. [Brandon*W.— *April A.],*91 AD3d 414 [1st Dept 2012]). To defeat a finding of neglect on that basis, the father was required to demonstrate that he was voluntarily and regularly participating in a recognized rehabilitative program, which he failed to do *(see id.).*Under these circumstances, petitioner agency was not required to establish the child’s impairment or risk of impairment *(Keoni,*91 AD3d at 415).

We have considered the father’s arguments and find them unavailing.

Concur — Friedman, J.P., Richter, Andrias, Gische and Moulton, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 133 (Monday, July 13, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37554]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18505]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-315-000]


Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company; Notice of Proposed Changes 
In FERC Gas Tariff

July 7, 1998.
    Take notice that on July 1, 1998, Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line 
Company (Panhandle) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, 
First Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheet to be effective 
August 1, 1998:

Fourth Revised Sheet No. 339

    Panhandle states that the purpose of this filing is to comply with 
the Commission's Order No. 587-G, issued April 16, 1998, at Docket No. 
RM96-1-007. The revised tariff sheet included herewith reflects Version 
1.2 standards promulgated by the Gas Industry Standards Board which 
were adopted by the Commission and incorporated by reference in the 
Commission's Regulations. Specifically, in addition to upgrading the 
version of previously adopted standards, newly adopted Standards 1.4.6, 
2.4.6, 4.3.5, 4.3.16 and 5.3.30 are incorporated by reference and 
Standard 4.3.4 has been deleted.
    Panhandle states that copies of this filing are being served on all 
affected customers, applicable state regulatory agencies and all 
parties to this proceeding.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a 
motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18505 Filed 7-10-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
*DoD 4000.25-7-M, March 2004*

DLM 4000.25, Volume 4

**DIC FS1/FS2/GS1/GS2 FORMAT**

**SUMMARY BILLING RECORD**

140

	APPENDIX 3.23

1
EXHIBIT 32.1

Section 1350 Certification

By Principal Executive Officer

I, Daniel Greenberg, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Electro Rent Corporation (the Company) for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, and the information
contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed original
of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.

Dated: August 8, 2011



/s/ Daniel GreenbergDaniel Greenberg
Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 128 (Monday, July 6, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 36402]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17841]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


Sunshine Act Meeting, Notice of Agency Meeting

    Pursuant to the provisions of the ``Government in the Sunshine 
Act'' (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that the Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation's Board of Directors will meet in open session at 
10:00 a.m. on Tuesday, July 7, 1998, to consider the following matters:
    Summary Agenda: No substantive discussion of the following items is 
anticipated. These matters will be resolved with a single vote unless a 
member of the Board of Directors requests that an item be moved to the 
discussion agenda.

Disposition of minutes of previous Board of Directors' meetings.
Reports of actions taken pursuant to authority delegated by the Board 
of Directors.
Memorandum and resolution re: Interim Rule to Amend Part 347 of the 
FDIC's Rules and Regulations.
Memorandum and resolution re: Part 325--Final Rule Revising the 
Regulatory Capital Treatment of Servicing Assets.
Memorandum and resolution re: Revised Statement of Policy on the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
Memorandum and resolution re: Revised Statement of Policy regarding the 
Assessment of Civil Money Penalties by the Federal Bank Regulatory 
Agencies.
Memorandum and resolution re: Final Amendments to Part 360--
Receivership Rules.

Discussion Agenda

Memorandum and resolution re: Part 330--Proposed Rule on Insurance of 
Joint Accounts and Payable-on-Death Accounts.
Memorandum and resolution re: Part 303--Final Rule on Applications, 
Requests, Submittals, Delegations of Authority, and Notices Required to 
be Filed by Statute or Regulation and related Policy Statements.

    The meeting will be held in the Board Room on the sixth floor of 
the FDIC Building located at 550--17th Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
    The FDIC will provide attendees with auxiliary aids (e.g., sign 
language interpretation) required for this meeting. Those attendees 
needing such assistance should call (202) 416-2449 (Voice); (202) 416-
2004 (TTY), to make necessary arrangements.
    Requests for further information concerning the meeting may be 
directed to Mr. Robert E. Feldman, Executive Secretary of the 
Corporation, at (202) 898-6757.

    Dated: June 30, 1998.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Robert E. Feldman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-17841 Filed 6-30-98; 4:08 pm]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Troy Fluellen, Appellant.

[769 NYS2d 259]

*287Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Margaret Clancy, J.), rendered May 21, 2001, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of burglary in the second degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the third degree, and reckless endangerment in the first degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 11 years, 5 years, and 2Vs to 7 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The verdict convicting defendant of first-degree reckless endangerment was based on legally sufficient evidence and was not against the weight of the evidence. The evidence permitted the jury to reasonably conclude that, during a struggle with the victim, defendant squeezed the trigger of his weapon and fired a shot, and that the weapon did not merely discharge as the result of the victim’s actions. Defendant’s conduct evinced depraved indifference to the life of the victim and created a grave risk of death *(see People v*Sanchez, 98 NY2d 373 [2002]).

The court properly exercised its discretion in denying defendant’s mistrial motion based on the prosecutor’s cross-examination of a defense witness concerning an unrelated murder. Defendant did not request the prosecutor to establish a good faith basis for this line of questioning *(see People v Kuss,*32 NY2d 436, 443-444 [1973], *cert denied*415 US 913 [1974]). In any event, the court cut off the inquiry before it reached the point of causing any undue prejudice. Defendant’s remaining challenges to the cross-examination of this witness are unpreserved *(see People v Harris,*98 NY2d 452, 492 [2002]; *People v Gonzalez,*55 NY2d 720 [1981]), and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find that the challenged inquiries were permissible.

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Andrias, Rosenberger and Friedman, JJ.
#### *State, Respondent, v. Starrish, Petitioner,*

No. 92138-5.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, No. 71519-4-1, July 27, 2015, 189 Wn. App. 1004. *Denied*January 6, 2016.
#### *State, Petitioner, v. Pierre, Respondent,*

No. 91805-8.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, No. 46008-4-II, June 4, 2015, 188 Wn. App. 1005. *Granted*and *remanded*to the Court of Appeals November 4, 2015.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 24(b)

                               POWER OF ATTORNEY

     The undersigned director of both Eagle-Picher Holdings, Inc. and
Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. hereby consents to and appoints David G. Krall and
John F. Sullivan, and each of them, as his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact and
agents with all power of substitution, for him and in his name, place and stead,
in any and all capacities, to sign the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the 2001
fiscal year of both Eagle-Picher Holdings, Inc. and Eagle-Picher Industries,
Inc., corporations organized and existing under the laws of the State of
Delaware and the State of Ohio respectively, and any and all amendments thereto,
and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and all documents in connection
therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the
requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, granting unto said
attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do
and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in
and about the same as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do
in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and
agents, or either of them, or their or his substitute or substitutes, may
lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue thereof.

     In Witness Whereof, the undersigned has hereunto set his hand on this 14th
day of February, 2002.

/s/ DANIEL C. WYLER
---------------------------------------------------------
Daniel C. Wyler
No. 10-1481.

#### Roland Johnson, Petitioner v. Manitowoc County, Wisconsin, et al.

565 U.S. 824, 132 S. Ct. 112,

181 L. Ed. 2d 37,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5399.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 635 F.3d 331.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.3

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of R.H. Donnelley
Inc. for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to such officer's knowledge:

      (1)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      (2)   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of R.H. Donnelley Inc. as of the dates and for the periods expressed
            in the Report.


/s/ David C. Swanson

David C. Swanson
Chief Executive Officer
May 15, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


                                       53
Exhibit 32.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2004

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Falcon Ridge Development Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report'),
I, Fred M. Montano, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 USC ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2004, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date: May 15, 2006                       /s/ Fred M. Montano
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Fred M. Montano, Chief Executive Officer
**MAPAD TABLE LAYOUT**

As of 4/1/2014
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 130 (Wednesday, July 8, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 36883]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18249]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND PLACE: 2:00 p.m., Wednesday, July 29, 1998.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington, D.C., 9th Floor Conference 
Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Enforcement Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.
Jean A Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 98-18249 Filed 7-6-98; 2:22 p.m.]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
HOW TO SUPPORT VACCINATION 

IN YOUR PRACTICE 

~ SAVETIME ~ SAVEMONEY ~ EMPOWER FAMILIES 

FRONT DESK& 

WAITING VACCINE PREPARATION AREA ROOM 

• Check vaccination history. • State that vaccines are due 

and provide vaccine 

information statements. 

• Maintain adequate vaccine inventory and supplies. 

• Follow storage, handling, and administration best practices. 

• Display educational materials. 

ADMINISTRATIVE 

OFFICE 

• Designate primary and alternate 

vaccine coordinators. 

• Integrate vaccination training 

into existing staff education. 

• Set up systems to prompt clinical 

staff, and remind parents and 

patients about needed vaccines. 

CHECK-OUT AREA 

• Schedule follow-up appointments 

before the patient leaves. 

• Reinforce importance of completing 

vaccine series. 

EXAM ROOMS 

• Start vaccine conversations earlier, 

with pregnant women and parents 

of very young infants. 

• Assume parents and patients will 

accept vaccines. 

• Recommend vaccines from your 

position as a trusted expert. 

• Listen to and answer questions. 

Everyone in a practice plays an important role. 

For more information and resources, visit CDC.GOV/VACCINES/FOSTER-SUPPORT 

SEPTEMBER 2020